CVE-2017-11731
Official description Straight from the sourceThe vendor's or NVD's own wording, published unedited. Authoritative, but often terse — it says what broke, rarely what to do.
NVD · uneditedAn invalid memory read vulnerability was found in the function OpCode (called from isLogicalOp and decompileIF) in util/decompile.c in Ming 0.4.8, which allows attackers to cause a denial of service via a crafted file.
Technical summary Written by usOur analysis, written from the advisory, the CVSS vector and the affected-version data. It adds context the advisory leaves out, and never invents facts that are not in the source.
dbcve analysis · moderate confidenceAn invalid memory read vulnerability exists in the OpCode function within util/decompile.c of Ming library 0.4.8. The function is called from isLogicalOp and decompileIF during the processing of SWF/Flash files. When parsing a specially crafted file, the code attempts to read from an invalid memory address, causing a denial of service.
Verify against the referenced sources before acting — the references below are authoritative for this CVE, this summary is not.
Affected products & versions What the vendor confirmedThe version ranges the vendor confirmed as vulnerable. If your version sits inside a range here, treat yourself as exposed until you have upgraded.
NVD · CPE data= 0.4.8CVSS breakdown How the score is builtThe industry scoring standard. It rates how the flaw is reached, what it takes to exploit, and what an attacker gains — the score is derived from those, not the other way round.
From the vector- Attack vector
- Local
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- None
- User interaction
- Required
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.0/AV:L/AC:L/PR:N/UI:R/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
Am I affected? How to checkSteps we derive from the advisory and the affected-version data, so you can decide whether this CVE reaches your setup. They are a guide, not a scan — your own configuration is the authority.
dbcve checksWork through these to decide whether this CVE applies to you.
-
Identify if the Ming library is installedRun 'dpkg -l | grep libming' or 'rpm -qa | grep ming' on Linux, or check for Ming.dll/libming.a in system directories on WindowsAffected if The package 'libming' version 0.4.8 or the library file libming.a/Ming.dll from version 0.4.8 is present on the system
-
Confirm the exact Ming version numberRun 'pkg-config --modversion ming' or check the library binary metadata for version 0.4.8Affected if The installed version is exactly 0.4.8
-
Check for applications or scripts using the Ming library for SWF processingSearch for executables or scripts that link against libming or use utilities from the Ming suite (e.g., ming-weaver, ming-listframes, swftocxx)Affected if Any application or tool that uses Ming to process SWF/Flash files is present and operational
-
Identify if untrusted SWF files are being processedReview application logs, file processing workflows, or web uploads that involve SWF/Flash file parsing through MingAffected if The system processes SWF/Flash files using Ming's decompile functionality, particularly through isLogicalOp or decompileIF code paths
A user is affected if Ming library version 0.4.8 is installed AND their system or applications process SWF/Flash files using the Ming library's decompilation functions.
Generated from the published advisory. Verify against your own configuration.
Remediation Closing itWhat it takes to close this. Where a vendor fix exists we point at it; where none exists we say so plainly, and can build one. Effort estimates are scoped from the advisory, not from your codebase.
From vendor dataUsers should avoid processing untrusted SWF/Flash files with Ming 0.4.8 until a patch is available. Consider upgrading to a patched version if released, or implement input validation before processing.
- Consultation2.0 h
- Implementation4.0 h
- Testing3.0 h
- Review / QA1.0 h
An estimate, not a bill — we confirm scope with you before any work starts. Need it this week? Rush from $2,800.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2017-11731 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.
References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.
Primary sourcesPractitioner notes
ContributedPeer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2017-11731 in production — separate from our analysis above.
The advisory tells you what broke. It rarely tells you what actually worked. If you’ve dealt with this one, that detail is what the next engineer is searching for.
- The version that genuinely resolved it — not the one the vendor claimed
- A config change or rule that shut the vector down
- A gotcha in the upgrade path that cost you an afternoon
No notes yet
Be the first to add a field note for this CVE — a mitigation you’ve verified, a version caveat, or a link to a working fix. Sign in above to contribute.
A place for practitioners to share what actually worked: a mitigation you’ve tested, a configuration change, a version- or environment-specific caveat, or a link to a verified patch. The most useful notes rise to the top as peers upvote them, so the signal stays high.
- Verified mitigations, workarounds, and config changes
- Version or environment caveats, and links to real fixes
- No weaponised exploit code, or anything meant to cause harm
- No spam, self-promotion, credentials, or personal data